Author Topic: Washington Redskins thread (2017) -Let's Win the Next Offseason!  (Read 21846 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nats Diamond

  • Posts: 19
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #25: January 02, 2017, 10:30:02 AM »

Online GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 18715
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #26: January 02, 2017, 12:23:53 PM »
Interesting interview on G&D with Cousins. He pretty much repeated what he said last night: it's up to the team. Wouldn't say "I really want to be here" despite several opportunities.

He came across clued-in and all business.

Maybe with McVay about to depart, and Kyle Shanahan on the rise, he figures he can go where he's wanted.

Offline Smithian

  • Posts: 8874
  • Team America 2018
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #27: January 02, 2017, 12:53:26 PM »
Redskins need to offer Kirk Cousins about $20 million a year. That's about what he was at this year on the tag. That is about Andy Dalton money. Makes Kirk rich and keeps around a QB who threw for almost 5,000 yards. Kirk will counter for whatever the yearly of value of this tag will be ($24 mil?) and then a team like Cleveland will light it up.

Here is my my way too early offseason preview: Cousins's value sky rockets, as it likely will, let him walk. I'm more confident in this offensive staff than I am Cousins. If he goes, the Redskins are sitting on $60 million in caps. Reasonable deals to keep around Baker, Garcon, and Vernon Davis won't eat up too much. Target defensive free agents like Calais Campbell, Brandon Williams, Tony Jefferson, Lawrence Timmons etc. Focus on defensive line and safety, with second priority on LB and maybe a LG or veteran RB. Plan on adding no less than $25 million annually on the defensive side. In the draft go all in on the front seven.

As for QB, I am fine coming back with Colt McCoy at starter if no logical fit appears in free agency or the draft. McCoy has been okay when playing for Jay Gruden. Jay's offense, like Jon's, doesn't seem to need a huge armed QB. Smart and decisive. That's McCoy. Then see if a guy stands out in draft or maybe take a flier on Mike Glennon. Just don't break the bank for Cousins. He is a good QB but he isn't carrying a bad defense to the promised land.

Offline mitlen

  • Posts: 55778
  • We had 'em all the way.
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #28: January 02, 2017, 12:55:05 PM »
Interesting interview on G&D with Cousins. He pretty much repeated what he said last night: it's up to the team. Wouldn't say "I really want to be here" despite several opportunities.

He came across clued-in and all business.

Maybe with McVay about to depart, and Kyle Shanahan on the rise, he figures he can go where he's wanted.

Listened to the interview on my walk.    They asked the question about "wanting to be here" 2 or 3 different ways and he didn't bite at all.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19298
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #29: January 02, 2017, 02:03:58 PM »
Going with McCoy has shades of shanny insisting grossman and beck are good qbs. As far as Kirk goes, I don't see him taking 20 per- why take a pay cut when the same deal will be on the table after next year? Likewise, I wonder what his trade value is - is a team willing to give a good pick to destroy their cap on a guy who is heading towards free agency?

Online KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 15557
  • Nats "hitting"
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #30: January 02, 2017, 03:44:22 PM »
All this hand-wringing over the QB position is pointless, anyhow.  The fact of the matter is that the Redskins are going nowhere fast unless they get much, much better on defense.

Offline MorseTheHorse

  • Posts: 3051
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #31: January 02, 2017, 03:44:33 PM »
Redskins need to offer Kirk Cousins about $20 million a year. That's about what he was at this year on the tag. That is about Andy Dalton money. Makes Kirk rich and keeps around a QB who threw for almost 5,000 yards. Kirk will counter for whatever the yearly of value of this tag will be ($24 mil?) and then a team like Cleveland will light it up.

Here is my my way too early offseason preview: Cousins's value sky rockets, as it likely will, let him walk. I'm more confident in this offensive staff than I am Cousins. If he goes, the Redskins are sitting on $60 million in caps. Reasonable deals to keep around Baker, Garcon, and Vernon Davis won't eat up too much. Target defensive free agents like Calais Campbell, Brandon Williams, Tony Jefferson, Lawrence Timmons etc. Focus on defensive line and safety, with second priority on LB and maybe a LG or veteran RB. Plan on adding no less than $25 million annually on the defensive side. In the draft go all in on the front seven.

As for QB, I am fine coming back with Colt McCoy at starter if no logical fit appears in free agency or the draft. McCoy has been okay when playing for Jay Gruden. Jay's offense, like Jon's, doesn't seem to need a huge armed QB. Smart and decisive. That's McCoy. Then see if a guy stands out in draft or maybe take a flier on Mike Glennon. Just don't break the bank for Cousins. He is a good QB but he isn't carrying a bad defense to the promised land.

Defense is bad so let a top 10 QB walk.  Logic checks out.  Just razzing you, I dunno what's best heh=)

Offline Nats Diamond

  • Posts: 19
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #32: January 03, 2017, 11:43:51 PM »
Redskins need to offer Kirk Cousins about $20 million a year. That's about what he was at this year on the tag. That is about Andy Dalton money. Makes Kirk rich and keeps around a QB who threw for almost 5,000 yards. Kirk will counter for whatever the yearly of value of this tag will be ($24 mil?) and then a team like Cleveland will light it up.

Here is my my way too early offseason preview: Cousins's value sky rockets, as it likely will, let him walk. I'm more confident in this offensive staff than I am Cousins. If he goes, the Redskins are sitting on $60 million in caps. Reasonable deals to keep around Baker, Garcon, and Vernon Davis won't eat up too much. Target defensive free agents like Calais Campbell, Brandon Williams, Tony Jefferson, Lawrence Timmons etc. Focus on defensive line and safety, with second priority on LB and maybe a LG or veteran RB. Plan on adding no less than $25 million annually on the defensive side. In the draft go all in on the front seven.

As for QB, I am fine coming back with Colt McCoy at starter if no logical fit appears in free agency or the draft. McCoy has been okay when playing for Jay Gruden. Jay's offense, like Jon's, doesn't seem to need a huge armed QB. Smart and decisive. That's McCoy. Then see if a guy stands out in draft or maybe take a flier on Mike Glennon. Just don't break the bank for Cousins. He is a good QB but he isn't carrying a bad defense to the promised land.

Hails to the no times 10 to letting Capt Kirk walk and starting McCoy.  There's a reason Cousins is the starter and Colts is the back up.  I don't see CM throwing for almost 5,000 yds let alone 4,000+ in back to back seasons.

Letting Big Cuz go to free up cap room and HOPEFULLY find another QB is on par with selling the house to pay the mortage.

Online KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 15557
  • Nats "hitting"
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #33: January 04, 2017, 03:22:25 AM »
Defense is bad so let a top 10 QB walk.  Logic checks out.  Just razzing you, I dunno what's best heh=)

Blow your wad on a QB when the defense isn't good enough to get past the wild card round.  Logic checks out.

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 43273
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #34: January 04, 2017, 07:18:05 AM »
Blow your wad on a QB when the defense isn't good enough to get past the wild card round.  Logic checks out.

Do you want a 3-5 win team, or a team that can get to the WC round?

Online KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 15557
  • Nats "hitting"
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #35: January 04, 2017, 06:07:26 PM »
If I were a Skins fan, I'd just hope they move the team to San Antonio and have the Jacksonville Jagoffs move to DC.

In all seriousness, the Wild Card round means freakall and normally you're better off with one or two really bad 3-5 win teams, allowing for a couple good drafts and a rebuild.  The Skins are about as adept at drafting as you are at being intellectually consistent, so I guess they might be the exception to this.

Offline Smithian

  • Posts: 8874
  • Team America 2018
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #36: January 04, 2017, 06:43:03 PM »
Defense is bad so let a top 10 QB walk.  Logic checks out.  Just razzing you, I dunno what's best heh=)
Hails to the no times 10 to letting Capt Kirk walk and starting McCoy.  There's a reason Cousins is the starter and Colts is the back up.  I don't see CM throwing for almost 5,000 yds let alone 4,000+ in back to back seasons.

Letting Big Cuz go to free up cap room and HOPEFULLY find another QB is on par with selling the house to pay the mortage.
I want Kirk Cousins to be back next year. But he needs to be in line for a bigger Andy Dalton contract. Kirk Cousins is a fringe top 10 QB. He doesn't need to be paid like a top 5 one which he could theoretically pushing it towards using the franchise tag and a team like the Browns as leverage.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19298
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #37: January 04, 2017, 08:17:00 PM »
I want Kirk Cousins to be back next year. But he needs to be in line for a bigger Andy Dalton contract. Kirk Cousins is a fringe top 10 QB. He doesn't need to be paid like a top 5 one which he could theoretically pushing it towards using the franchise tag and a team like the Browns as leverage.

He's going to get paid like a top five because the redskins low balled him last year when he would have taken top 10 money. He has no reason to take less than he'll make next year. The reskins are in a crap position because they had five years to evaluate him, but needed another. He put up great numbers and he's going to get paid, either this year by the redskins or next year by someone else

Online GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 18715
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #38: January 04, 2017, 08:24:21 PM »
Can you franchise-tag a player and then trade him? There's something to be said for moving on now if you don't think he's the long term answer, or if you feel like you need too many other pieces to make a run with him in the next few years.

He's going to get paid like a top five because the redskins low balled him last year when he would have taken top 10 money. He has no reason to take less than he'll make next year. The reskins are in a crap position because they had five years to evaluate him, but needed another. He put up great numbers and he's going to get paid, either this year by the redskins or next year by someone else

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 43273
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #39: January 04, 2017, 09:04:02 PM »
Can you franchise-tag a player and then trade him? There's something to be said for moving on now if you don't think he's the long term answer, or if you feel like you need too many other pieces to make a run with him in the next few years.


Yes, you can.

It's not that he's not the long term answer, it's that there is so much to build up around him to get in to serious contention. The defense has serious needs, the foremost being an identity. Cousins needs a running game. We can't rely on him to throw 40+ times a game.

The question is can that be done in the next three years?

Honestly, you keep him because you don't have another option, but if someone gives you a stupid offer (like the Browns come knocking with both their first rounders, or the Broncos offer an RGIII deal) take it. But other than that, the Skins got cap room. They need to do what the Giants did Nd make the most of this window

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 43273
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #40: January 04, 2017, 09:57:19 PM »
https://mobile.twitter.com/SPORTalkSkins/status/816718829556482049

I'm sure it's bullcrap, but I like hearing stuff like this. Cousins strength is timing routes and the intermediate passing game. Britt, Jeffery, and Pryor are perfect for that. All can get open deep enough to keep opposing defenses honest.

Offline GuyFromCO

  • Posts: 611
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #41: January 04, 2017, 10:07:42 PM »
Blow your wad on a QB when the defense isn't good enough to get past the wild card round.  Logic checks out.

You either luck out on a cheap QB (who get expensive quick too), or you pay 'em. That's the game.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 25003
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #42: January 05, 2017, 08:56:37 AM »
Normally you're better off with one or two really bad 3-5 win teams, allowing for a couple good drafts and a rebuild.  The Skins are about as adept at drafting as you are at being intellectually consistent, so I guess they might be the exception to this.
You'd be surprised how quickly a few good drafts can become costly.  I'm not sure who has been better at restocking and staying continuously near the top than the Evil Empire, but it amazes me how quickly the lineups from their stacked teams get disassembled.  BB has used his top choices almost exclusively on defense for the past 10 years or so, but he's had to turnover almost all of his 1st and 2d round draft choices after their rookie contracts.  Drafting well with later picks and signing cheap free agents let's you spread the money around and bring in guys for reasonable pay who may not be elite but are good system fits. 

Offline mitlen

  • Posts: 55778
  • We had 'em all the way.
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #43: January 05, 2017, 09:09:54 AM »
You'd be surprised how quickly a few good drafts can become costly.  I'm not sure who has been better at restocking and staying continuously near the top than the Evil Empire, but it amazes me how quickly the lineups from their stacked teams get disassembled.  BB has used his top choices almost exclusively on defense for the past 10 years or so, but he's had to turnover almost all of his 1st and 2d round draft choices after their rookie contracts.  Drafting well with later picks and signing cheap free agents let's you spread the money around and bring in guys for reasonable pay who may not be elite but are good system fits. 

You can do that when you have Brady/Ben/Eli, Rodgers, etc. on the offensive side.    I wouldn't say Gronk, Blount and a decent offensive line are chopped liver either.     Sometimes, teams are simply lucky (not NE particularly) and there is no plan for luck.    NE had a pretty good "system" before BB (like Pittsburgh and Tomlin) arrived.      It'll be interesting to see what happens especially when Brady (for more than four games :)) is gone.   Though Cassell did a nice job.    Will New England become BB's newest Cleveland?

OT  The 'skins have to tag or pay Cousins (IMHO).    He's a decent QB in a mediocre world of QBs.    There aren't many good QBs around.   Check around the league and see how many teams got rid of a QB so they could "upgrade".    Mindfact, most of the time it hasn't worked out.   It's gone from mediocre to mediocre at best.      I believe he still has a lot of upside left but in the end  ....  it's about the money.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19298
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #44: January 05, 2017, 10:18:22 AM »
Yep, I don't understand the mindset that we can replace cousins when it took us 20 years to get someone as good as vousins

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 43273
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #45: January 05, 2017, 10:56:07 AM »
I don't understand the mindset of people who aren't willing to pay him 20-22 million a year.

Here is the percentage of the salary cap the playoff QBs who are no longer on their rookie contract are getting:
Brady - 12.9%, though his cap hit is only 13 million due to a new restructure.
Tannehill - 12.4%
Big Ben - 14%
Osweiler - 11.6%
Smith - 10.9%
Manning - 13.5%
Rodgers - 14%
Stafford - 11.3%
Ryan - 13.3%
Wilson 14.1%

Paying Cousins ~13% is completely logical, especially considering he's as good, if not better, than at least half that list. Pay him, let Garcon and Jackson walk, get a receiver in free agency, then spend on the defense.

Online GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 18715
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #46: January 05, 2017, 11:01:08 AM »
I hear what you are saying, but without Garcon and Jackson, would the underneath game be as open? His performances without Reed aren't as good, and if Reed stays injured, then what?

I think you need to keep Garcon, too. He's a manimal. Jackson, I'm not so sure about, given that he's about 5'9" and 170. and can't survive hard hits. And every NFL hit is a hard hit when you're 170 pounds.

I don't understand the mindset of people who aren't willing to pay him 20-22 million a year.

Here is the percentage of the salary cap the playoff QBs who are no longer on their rookie contract are getting:
Brady - 12.9%, though his cap hit is only 13 million due to a new restructure.
Tannehill - 12.4%
Big Ben - 14%
Osweiler - 11.6%
Smith - 10.9%
Manning - 13.5%
Rodgers - 14%
Stafford - 11.3%
Ryan - 13.3%
Wilson 14.1%

Paying Cousins ~13% is completely logical, especially considering he's as good, if not better, than at least half that list. Pay him, let Garcon and Jackson walk, get a receiver in free agency, then spend on the defense.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 11494
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #47: January 05, 2017, 11:05:22 AM »
I hear what you are saying, but without Garcon and Jackson, would the underneath game be as open? His performances without Reed aren't as good, and if Reed stays injured, then what?

I think you need to keep Garcon, too. He's a manimal. Jackson, I'm not so sure about, given that he's about 5'9" and 170. and can't survive hard hits. And every NFL hit is a hard hit when you're 170 pounds.
I don't know if they should sign Jackson.  But they will miss him Unless they can find another guy to stretch the field. Ask the Eagles.

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 43273
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #48: January 05, 2017, 11:10:27 AM »
I hear what you are saying, but without Garcon and Jackson, would the underneath game be as open? His performances without Reed aren't as good, and if Reed stays injured, then what?

I think you need to keep Garcon, too. He's a manimal. Jackson, I'm not so sure about, given that he's about 5'9" and 170. and can't survive hard hits. And every NFL hit is a hard hit when you're 170 pounds.

I'm not opposed to Garcon, but you're going to need 10+ million a year. I'd much rather use that money to get Alshon Jeffery, Tyrell Pryor, or Kenny Britt.

I expect the offense to take somewhat of a hit. But I think that could be mitigated by getting a center/guard in free agency and a decent running back.

Online GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 18715
Re: Re: Washington Redskins thread (2016)
« Reply #49: January 05, 2017, 11:22:42 AM »
You know a lot more about available free agents than I do. Probably most of you do.

I think I'll just go back to watching this conversation. :)

I'm not opposed to Garcon, but you're going to need 10+ million a year. I'd much rather use that money to get Alshon Jeffery, Tyrell Pryor, or Kenny Britt.

I expect the offense to take somewhat of a hit. But I think that could be mitigated by getting a center/guard in free agency and a decent running back.